Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Ex-Marine Found Guilty In 'American Sniper' Murder Trial

  Chris Kyle was killed by a fellow military soldier after returning from the Middle East.  The trial of his killer ended last night.  He was given life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Listen to the story.  What do you think of it?  Was it fair where the case was held?  What do you think about what the family members said after the trial?  While you weren't able to analyze the case, what are your initial impressions about it?  Was justice served?  Or, did this seem like an unfair trial?  
Write 8 lines about it.  Also, remember to respond to two or more students in a thorough, thoughtful way.  Here are expectations for blogging.  

42 comments:

  1. The case sounds made up and seems like the state of Texas just dose not want weed legalized in the state. Although the man murdered the american sniper in his hometown I do not think the trial was fair because the people of the jury may have known the american sniper and wanted to get revenge so they found the man guilty. I think the family members was happy that they got justice from the jury. But the the family of the man that did the murder may be upset. -Daveonne Banks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. this case is BS. Kill a man plead that your insane. But can go get 2-3 tacos.....

      Delete
    2. I agree that the case kind of seems made up .. and I think you're right about the whole jury and revenge thing! - MaiLani Pridgen

      Delete
    3. I don't agree with you about the case being made up. I think factors of the case are so unrealistic like a man going to taco bell after murdering 2 friends. But I agree about the jury. They might've been a little bias. - Domonique Swanigan

      Delete
  2. I feel like him being tried in Chris Kyle's hometown is irrelevant because you are put on trial in the place that the crime was committed so that doesn't have anything to do with the case. They obviously felt that he deserved everything that was coming toward him so they didn't move his case to ensure that right. He knew he was wrong and so did everyone else. The marijuana spiel was also irrelevant because use of marijuana no matter how loud it is cause you to act erratic. it seems to me like he was jealous because they both served but no one showed him love like they did Chris so he murdered him because of that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with the weed part i said the same thing.- Daveonne Banks

      Delete
    2. It doenst even truly matter where the case is

      Delete
  3. Its me again Tyshawn.......And what i think is that well 1)The muder was wrong period!. How do you attempt to plead non-guilty for something like this. "oh im insane" get out of here with that BS. If your insane, like the lady said on the broadcast. If your so called insane how can you get get what 2 or 3 tacos. How did you (like the lady said) order, drive up to the window, and then pay? And the whole "is it fair" part. Why would it not be fair if the case is held in Chris's hometown? Does it truly matter where the case is held. The case could be moved over to india...You gonna tell me it isnt fair. This BS that was given by the so called "insane" killer is well..BS. Your just high, clearly shown. Kill a man, then go get 2-3 tacos from taco bell....Insane my.......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree he is not insane. -Daveonne Banks

      Delete
    2. You make a valid point, you cant just claim that you're insane when you get caught for killing people! - MaiLani Pridgen

      Delete
    3. i agree with the fact that he isnt insane. tacos are good.-Jayden

      Delete
  4. I feel like the case was fair. I mean, he killed TWO people. I was going to suggest that he takes the death penalty, but i dont think it was fair for him to die; at least he admitted to doing the crime. He could at least have gotten parole. He was high on marijuanna, so necessarily, he wasn't in the right mind frame when he made the decision. I dont really know what to decide between the case being fair or unfair. Its kind of confusing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I disagree with the man getting parole. If this man was as high and insane as his lawyers portrayed him to be then why give a man that murdered TWO people a chance at getting back on the streets to kill more people ? I believe he got a fair ruling. - Domonique Swanigan

      Delete
  5. this is mine! - MaiLani Pridgen

    ReplyDelete
  6. I actually think that the trial was fair. He murdered two people and the fact that he was high on marijuana does not mean that he didn't know what he was doing. I believe that justice was served and life without parole is the right punishment. He killed 2 people and admitted to doing it. I felt like it was the right thing to do and he deserved the sentence that he got. That's my simple opinion. -Anthony

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that the trial was fair. He definitely murdered people, smoking to marijuana haves nothing to do with it, he knew exactly what he was doing, especially since he went to taco bell afterwards. meaning he was in control with his thought since he was ordering without a panic.But in all honesty he didn't have a chance. i feel if he was insane that wouldn't change it since he killed an American Marine Hero, and on top of that he was trialed in his home town, there was no way out of what he did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i agree. tacos are good, but besides that what you said was true.-Jayden

      Delete
    2. I agree with the fact that you pointed out that marijuana does not have that type of affect on a person, and does not provoke them to do a senseless act of violence. -UNESHA BANKS

      Delete
  8. i think the trial was fair. if you could smoke weed, go kill some people, and order a burrito afterwards, you knew what you were doing. dont give me that crap about, "i was insane, i didnt know what i was doing." justice was served, he admitted to killing the 2 people. if you could kill 2 people and eat mexican food afterwards like you didnt do anything, like you didnt just kill 2 people, you deserve locked away.-Jayden

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. exactly what i said, like he was in full control of his decision. No insane person would be able to. no sane person would either honesty

      Delete
    2. I agree that the man definitely knew what he was doing, and that he was not insane. -UNESHA BANKS

      Delete
    3. Exactly. -Shadai

      Delete
  9. I think that it was not right that they did it in the hometown of the American Sniper, especially since he was a hero in many eyes so it may lean people toward their decision of the accused killer as guilty. Also I saw a interview with one of the jury people and they were asked if the movie had affected their decision. This is a good question because the movie could have played a major role in the decision. Another reason why they said that the killer was guilty was because he always played the excuse that he was insane when he go into trouble. But if someone is really insane, do they openly tell people. When I hear of people who are insane or crazy they don't tell people but you just can tell. However I do think that justice was served, because I felt like the man was guilty. - UNESHA BANKS

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that the justice was not served.

      Delete
    2. Do you think the case is 100% justified even though they used the movie to get a clearer picture? -Aniayla

      Delete
  10. I think the ruling was fair. There's no way that the man was insane enough to kill 2 men but then go to taco bell. That just doesn't make any sense to me. However I believe the jury might've been a little bias. They were in Chris Kyle's home town and He was also an American hero. So if the jury seen the movie and thought of the man as a patriot then of course the jury would automatically call the killer guilty and sentence him to jail. The verdict was fair but the reasons behind it most likely wasn't - Domonique Swanigan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think if they had it in a different court he would still be trialed as guilty, but i agree with what was said

      Delete
    2. I agree too but there also had to be other factors that could have triggered him to commit those acts of murder. -Aniayla

      Delete
    3. I agree too.
      queenie

      Delete
    4. Adriel
      I agree with you because he had to be mentally stable enough to kill 2 people and then go get some food after that.

      Delete
  11. I think the case was not justified because if he was in and out if psychiatric institution multiple times that means the people in the facility thought he was okay and send him out but he would always wind up back in. I do not think he has fully recovered from his psychotic issues. Whoever signed and said he was able to leave the institution because of his good behavior should be accounted for like either fine them or lock them away for a couple of months. -Aniayla

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree he shouldn't been held responsible, they should of been responsible for letting him go.

      Delete
  12. I believe that the trial was not fair. Even though he was on marijuana I believe that it was not fair that he was tried that way. If he was not in the right state of mind I don't know why he would be responsible for getting a death penalty. I believe he should get charged for doing marijuana and robbing a truck but, to die I feel is extreme. I think the family members of the dead are happy, but his are probably disappointed. None of the stories matched up to the different people that said, so how is he getting charge for something he don't recall clearly? I feel that he should have a chance like other people for parole and something is not right about how he was tried.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Adriel
      Well I don't exactly agree with you because I think he was aware of his actions but I understand why you would say it wasn't fair.

      Delete
  13. Adriel
    I think the trial was fair. Just because your high on marijuana does not mean you aren't aware of what your doing. He killed two people and then went to taco bell, i think he was planning to kill them because who would go too get food after killing someone? It seems like he had already thought about what he was going to do. I don't think he was insane because he was aloud of the mental facilities early, but that could go both ways because he had to be put in the mental facilities for a reason. However, I don't think he was mentally insane and I think he was aware of what he was doing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. being high doesn't mean you don't know what right or whats wrong. -Shadai

      Delete
    2. exactly, he was probably thinking, "im gonna kill these 2, then go get a burrito."

      Delete
  14. I think that Eddie Rouff is guilty because although he was high at the moment, doesn't mean he isn't accountable for what he did. Everybody should know that killing someone is wrong, whether you are in the right mind or not. The article said he killed to people, so it wasn't his first time. Another thing the article said was that he went in and out of rehab, so he clearly was a lunatic, because many people who come out of the army have PTSD or something of that sort that makes him out of his mind. -Shadai

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like what you said here, "Everybody should know that killing someone is wrong, whether you are in the right mind or not." That seems to make sense to me.

      Delete
  15. I think that him getting sentenced for life was good. I like how he stood up and owned up to him killing the two men. the one thing that I did not like was when the lawyer said " he went to taco bell because he had the munchies" the way she said it was real disrespectful. I honestly think that the man is insane because he killed both of the men and then went to taco bell after that he left town. just to remember being high off of marijuana does not make you go crazy.
    Queenie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your quote, "I did not like was when the lawyer said " he went to taco bell because he had the munchies" the way she said it was real disrespectful." It makes it seem that people who use marijuana recreationaly are criminals.

      Delete
    2. And I'm not completely convinced that is the case.

      Delete